[impact]

Is there some kind of joke or meme I missed that requires this very picture to be posted on each and every page of every K-x thread at least once?

[nostatic]

how about such idea?

Bad UI.

You are expecting the user to make a fairly serious abstraction from the display. The reason that AF points are superimposed on the image is that you at least have a correlation between the process (AF) and the geometry. Putting the reference in the numeric LED means that not only does the user have to abstract from the image they see in front of them down to a space occupied by text, but then they have to make an association that they are not familiar with (correlating de-contextualized led segments to an AF array). When you factor in the target audience (new dSLR owners), this is a *really* bad design.

Sorry. You are asking users to make a number of cognitive leaps. Only very experienced shooters would be able to make heads or tails of this. Those users should buy a K7.

[ogl]

Pentax can't offer camera for me now. It's rather sad for me.

[johnmflores]

I thought it was actually a pretty good answer, but I'll restate it more diplomatically:

Selectable focus points are useful if you want to focus on something not at the center of the frame. Yes, you could point at the object then recompose, but sometimes you don't want to give up that extra fraction of a second, as when shooting a series of shots of a moving subject (still subjects are no problem, because you can focus once then switch to MF mode). Focusing then recomposing can also introduce slight focus errors when using extremely shallow DOF if your lens has an unusually flat focus field.

As for why you would *want* to focus on something not at center, that's pretty common, really, as in this shot:

1 - nice photo, but it could have been shot by focusing on the subject and recomposing, unless she suddenly got up and jumped off the rock

2 - AFAIK, the focus point is selectable, it's just not viewable as the red point in the viewfinder. So if you didn't want to or couldn't focus and recompose (i.e., you wanted to shoot a moving motorcycle and wanted it on the right third of the shot), you'd go to the LCD, change the focus point, and then take your photos.

3 - I'd be surprised if the focus point was not highlighted in LiveView mode. After all, in this case it's simply a matter of turning a couple of pixels red.

I have to agree with the others that while selectable AND visible focus points are important to some (but not all) pros and enthusiasts, it's probably not a big concern for someone moving up from a P&S to their first dSLR. The inclusion of face detection is probably a more important feature to them, since it's a feature they may have had on their point and shoot, and reflects what a lot of people will want to do with the camera - take better snapshots of friends and family.

At the end of the day, I think that the number of people upset about the focus points will be far outweighed by the people that love the color options. I love the ultra-competitive pricepoint, and adding any of the features that people here want (focus points, WR, external mic input, etc...) would have added either cost or time to market.

Is it perfect for everyone?
No.

Is it a K200d replacement?
Yes to some, no to others.

Will it bring a lot of new photographers into the Pentax fold, many of whom will acquire LBA, drive up sales volume and hopefully get Pentax to cut lens prices (in exchange for increased volume)?
I sure hope so!

[Marc Sabatella]

1 - nice photo, but it could have been shot by focusing on the subject and recomposing, unless she suddenly got up and jumped off the rock

Of course - actually, that's exactly how I shot it, since I have my K200D permanently set to center focus point, and I have also turned off that annoying red square. I didn't post this picture as an example of something that requires selectable focus points - I never use them myself, consider them far more trouble than they're worth, and think people are making a mountain out of a molehill here. But the person to whom I was responding specifically asked, "why would you want to focus on something not in the center", and although that might seem obvious enough to you or me, I thought it deserved a response. There are *lots* of situations where you might want to focus on something not in the center; this is but one example. However, in 99% of those situations, focus-recompose works just fine, and in the rest, manual focus fixes all. And with face detection, selectable focus points via the LCD, live view, and the other focusing aids available, a lot of people will do just fine without even using focus-recompose or MF.

Your other points are all excellent and are indeed part of why I think this is being blow way out of proportion. Sure, some people are so used to doing things one way and cannot imagine any other way of doing things, and for them, this is unfortunately not the camera. There's still an awful lot of people left in the world who will be able to deal with this just fine.

Although FWIW, not knowing how much more it would have cost to add the indicators, or what effect it would have had on size/weight/time-to-market, I do suspect people are right that leaving them out was a mistake that will cost more than in saved in the long run. But it shouldn't be the gloom-and-doom icture people are painting. And in any event, we're all just guessing here. Do any of us really think we have access to better marketing data, sales figures, cost/benefit analyses, and so on, than Pentax does?

[pxpaulx]

im waiting to see some comparometer shots vs the k20d, but im very tempted to sell the k20d and get the kx until the k8 comes along then the kx can be the backup body.

I dont feel the k7 is enough to upgrade right now.

Without having any significant IQ improvement over the K20, I just couldnt see upgrading to a k7 (or its replacement whenever that comes along), and having to get both a new body and grip (though being able to use AAs in grip is nice).

I am definitely getting the Kx, except in my case it will be for occasional video (goodbye panny tz4, I hardly knew thee), for my wife's use, and as my k20 backup - the k20 just feels to right in my hand to let go, unless there is something earth shattering coming up in its place, i.e. a k30d (but I think that, despite all that has been said about the K7 not being a k20 replacement, the Kxxd line is done).

[JamieP]

Marc. Thanks. The picture made sense. I still don't get how you would use a selectable point on a moving object, sports etc, as by the time you select, it's at another point and so on.

Plan the shot ahead of time and then execute it- you can't select on the fly. For example:

In this scenario:
-shooting a football game
-offense moving left to right
-you want a shot of the QB in the throwing motion with a nice composition where the player is looking and throwing into the frame

Execute like this:
-select one of the left focus points prior to the play
-track the QB with that focus point during the play using AF-C
-shoot to capture the action you want (without recomposing)

This allows you to keep the QB in focus and maintain the correct composition so you are ready to shoot when the action is right.

[Marc Sabatella]

AA = it means the customer need to buy NiMh accumulators and charger.
Additonal expense.

OK, but are there really that many people who don't already own AA's and a charger from some other device? And given that a package of 8 cells and a charger will set you back all of $20-25 - which is to say, less than the cost of a typical spare proprietary battery - I don't really see how this works out to be a disadvantage.

[ftpaddict]

AA = it means the customer need to buy NiMh accumulators and charger.
Additonal expense.

A good set of NiMH batteries + charger costs about as much as a new Li-Ion battery.

A fresh set of Eneloops costs next to nothing to replace.

[Marc Sabatella]

Marc. Thanks. The picture made sense. I still don't get how you would use a selectable point on a moving object, sports etc, as by the time you select, it's at another point and so on.

Right; what I'm describing basically assumes the moving subject stays in the same relative position in the viewfinder. Like someone running toward or away from you. Or, say, a musician who is bobbing and weaving but still staying in one basic spot in front of a mic or music stand.

Anyhow, my explanation wasn't meant to describe how "necessary" it is - because I don't believe for one second that it is. I'm just trying to answer the question of when could it potentially be more useful than other methods. There are such cases; they just aren't as big a deal as some make them out to be.

[aleonx3]

OK, but are there really that many people who don't already own AA's and a charger from some other device? And given that a package of 8 cells and a charger will set you back all of $20-25 - which is to say, less than the cost of a typical spare proprietary battery - I don't really see how this works out to be a disadvantage.

I will add to Marc's comment; most people still want AA and charger since most will need to use flash. Of course the argument can be that you don't need NiMH battery for flash just simple alkaline will do. My experience with that is the good NiMH battery lasts longer and power discharge is more even.

[Marc Sabatella]

And the Canon gets rave reviews for it's "excellent low light AF" (DP Review), regardless.

Does Pentax? Nope.

You have apparently never heard of the K-m, the model that the K-x directly replaces. I suggest you look it up.

Did a $650 Pentax with kit lens last year in September give you AF select and superimposition?

That's a silly comparison. The K200D kit did not come out at $650, it came out at $800. No fair comparing brand new list prices to closeout prices. The K200D was clearly aimed at a different market than the K-x. Pretending otherwise is a strawman.

Anyhow, yes, we all realize that in a couple of very small ways, the K-x is a notch below the K200D. It's also a step *up* in an incredible number of ways - pretty amazingly so, actually, for a camera released in a *lower* bracket than a predecessor.

If it turns out that Pentax is going with a two-tired system - K-7 on top, Kx on bottom - then it is not realistic to expect the K-x to completely replace the middle tier in a three-tiered system, and you look foolish for implying otherwise. If, on the other hand, it turns out Pentax replaces a true K200D replacement and maintains a three-tiered system, then you look foolish for not considering this possibility. Which type of fool would you prefer to be perceived as?

Did it have a kit lens with metal mount and hood?

Yes.

Then it's another downgrade.

Did the competition remove these things to go cheaper?

No.

Which competition are you referring to? There are plenty of low end models from other manufacturers with plastic mounts and no hoods.

Did the competition significantly improve AF and low-light performance?

Yes.

In fact, it's a consensus thread in reviews.

Same with Pentax, as you'd know if you paid even the slightest bit of attention. The K-m was significantly improved over previous models, a fact which cannot have escaped any competent reviewer. And th K-7 is improved still. The K-x isn't up to the K-7 standard, but is an improvement - more points, ability to select them in a fashion - over the already improved K-m it replaces.

[aleonx3]

Without having any significant IQ improvement over the K20, I just couldnt see upgrading to a k7 (or its replacement whenever that comes along), and having to get both a new body and grip (though being able to use AAs in grip is nice).

I am definitely getting the Kx, except in my case it will be for occasional video (goodbye panny tz4, I hardly knew thee), for my wife's use, and as my k20 backup - the k20 just feels to right in my hand to let go, unless there is something earth shattering coming up in its place, i.e. a k30d (but I think that, despite all that has been said about the K7 not being a k20 replacement, the Kxxd line is done).

I just came back from the Pentax promo at Henrys. The K-7 and K-x are strategic models that are targetted for people who expect video feature to be part of the DSLR (advance and beginner) - competing with 7D, D3000, T1i and D5000. I think the successor to K-xx and K-xxx line are more in line with photography (although LV is included); I expect more frame speed and high iso performance to be in that line. The k-7 is a bit improvement over my K10, so that is my next upgrade. Compare with k20, the k-7 may not be a great step unless you want video. If I were in your situation, I do the same as you suggested or wait for the successor of k20.

[jct us101]

Pentax can't offer camera for me now. It's rather sad for me.

You've said that 20 times in this thread alone.

Then GO AWAY.

[séamuis]

You've said that 20 times in this thread alone.

Then GO AWAY.

what was that about, if you haven't anything nice to say don't say anything?

oh wait... here we are:

So really guys, if you don't like what I'm posting then ignore me (I think you can do that on this forum!) and I will do the same just like I always did

a bit out of context, but the message is the same. care to follow your own advice?